Lawyers Condemn Kizza Besigye Lawyer Eron Kiiza’s Jail Term as a Mockery of Justice

The sentencing of Counsel Eron Kiiza to nine months in prison for contempt of the Uganda People’s Defense Forces-UPDF General Court Martial presided over by Brigadier Robert Freeman Mugabe on Tuesday, has ignited widespread condemnation from members of the legal fraternity and beyond.

Kiiza was representing Dr. Kizza Besigye and Obeid Lutaale Kamulegeya, who are accused of illegal possession of firearms and ammunition. According to the Court Martial chairperson, Kiiza confronted a court orderly over seating arrangements and caused a commotion, which the court deemed contemptuous.

Mugabe said, “The chairman of the court warned him of the misconduct, but he did not take heed. Instead, he worsened the situation by making more noise, being cheered by the audience.” Several lawyers, including Humphrey Tumwesigye, Andrew Mumpenjje, Samuel Muyizzi Mulindwa, and Erias Lukwago, have criticized the decision as illegal, emotionally charged, and a violation of due process.

Tumwesigye said, “The chairman court martial did not use the law and the judge advocate who advises that court used emotions. It’s very unfortunate, and every citizen who wishes this country well must come out and condemn such impunity of court-martial.”

Counsel Samuel Muyizzi Mulindwa, who witnessed the proceedings claimed that Kiiza was physically mistreated during his arrest, including being strangled and sustaining a dislocated arm. Muyizzi said, “Let no one tell the country that the jailing of Kiiza was not premeditated. It was an act of aggression against all lawyers in the case committed by the soldiers.”

Erias Lukwago described the incident as a “mockery of justice” and a “rape and defilement of the constitution,” citing violations of Kiiza’s non-derogable rights. Lukwago said, “What we witnessed was a blatant flout of several processes. There should have been civility, and even if it’s a sham trial, it should have had a semblance of justice.”

A State Attorney, speaking anonymously, called the offense of criminal contempt “a colonial relic that stifles legitimate criticism and curtails freedom of expression.” The attorney added, “It was originally designed to suppress dissent and protect ruling elites.

“It now warrants critical reassessment and potential abolition to foster a more open and accountable judicial system. The conviction and sentencing of Counsel Eron Kiiza under this outdated practice is regrettable, and it mirrors a dismal adherence to archaic legal standards that undermine justice and the integrity of the legal profession.”

Lawyer Andrew Mumpenjje outlined procedural flaws in the case, saying, “Contempt of court presupposes that court has started and is in motion. In this case, the court was just planning to start.” He cited a Supreme Court ruling that clarified the necessary steps for handling criminal contempt, which were not followed.

“Secondly, the Supreme Court in Presidential Petition No.1 of 2020, Ivan Ssebadduka Vs Chairperson Electoral Commission has guided on the process to follow in criminal contempt. The court draws up the charge sheet, it reads it to the accused (Eron in this case), he pleads to the charge sheet as to whether he thinks is in contempt or not, it gives him a chance to explain why he is not in contempt in case he pleaded not guilty, the court after listening to him then makes judgment on whether it finds him in contempt or not. Then if he is in contempt, it must allow Him to submit in mitigation of his sentence showing why he should not be given a harsh sentence. This process was not followed at all. Eron was sent to Kitalya without hearing him at all”, said Mumpenjje.

“The whole process offended the due process of Besigye, Lutale, and Eron. Everything was ridiculous,” said Mumpenjje. He also noted, “Even if the right process had been followed, nine months seems too harsh a sentence.” The Uganda Law Society (ULS) has launched three separate fact-finding missions in response to the case. According to ULS President Isaac Ssemakadde, the first delegation will visit Kiiza at Kitalya Government Prison to establish the circumstances of his incarceration and discuss potential remedies.

“Concurrently, a second delegation will engage with the General Court Martial and hold consultations with Senior Counsel Martha Karua and Advocate Erias Lukwago. Additionally, a third delegation will meet with the Chief Justice of Uganda, Alfonse Chigamoy Owiny-Dollo, to demand expeditious delivery of the Supreme Court’s judgment in Attorney General vs Michael Kabaziguruka, a case which bears direct relevance to the jurisdiction of military courts over civilians.”

However, Enoch Barata, Director of Legal Services at the National Resistance Movement, defended the court’s decision. Barata said, “The lawyer was in contempt, and the court had the power and duty to deal with contempt in the face of court.”

The Supreme Court is yet to rule on the pending Michael Kabaziguruka case, which seeks to clarify the jurisdiction of military courts over civilians. Many see this judgment as critical in determining the broader implications of the Court Martial’s decision.